Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest snnib

I tried X Plane

Recommended Posts

I tried the latest version of X-Plane and found that the best feature it offered me was the beautiful startup photo !The rest of it...................well maybe I best not comment.It remained on my computer for four days - Now I am back to real flight simulation with FS9 and FSX, FS9 being my preference.Best wishes to all who made up the ACEs team and THANK YOU ALL for giving me such enjoyment.regardsRichard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I tried the latest version of X-Plane and found that the best feature it offered me was the beautiful startup photo !The rest of it...................well maybe I best not comment.It remained on my computer for four days - Now I am back to real flight simulation with FS9 and FSX, FS9 being my preference.Best wishes to all who made up the ACEs team and THANK YOU ALL for giving me such enjoyment.regardsRichard
Richard,I'm glad you recognize the differences and identify your preference as personal preference rather than matter of fact. I have had X-Plane from version 6 or so all the way through 9.22. It is different. The menus are not graphical, the key controls are different, but you can select more joystick/keyboard control option than most sets of flight controls can physically accommodate. The thing that amazes me is that on the main page you have to scroll the screen several times to read through all of the updates to systems failures that you can program into the aircraft, and the aerodynamic modeling continues to improve. We're talking about a minor release from 9.22 to 9.30 and these improvements are continuous. These are among a few things that keeps me buying X-Plane and downloading the free auto-updates. I just have to remind myself that they are different.I would say that FS9 and FSX simulates the ground environment in a more appealing fashion, but I cannot say that Flight is simulated better in the MS products. It is just my opinion from a few years of using both programs that X-Plane could potential incorporate AI flights, more involved ATC and with the improving scenery if the developers ever choose to and it would not have that far to go for me to be fully satisfied. But after a few hours of X-Plane 9 you get used to sloped runways and a few other aerodynamic modeling differences. I'm not arguing your point because if if X-Plane had the same appeal and same 3rd party addon development I would be completely an X-Plane flyer. Please let this not be the same as a thread I saw a few weeks ago where folks were arguing over whether MS Flight Sim was a game or not. It's what you need it to be for yourself. Have Fun and may the Flight be with you.Keith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Richard,I would say that FS9 and FSX simulates the ground environment in a more appealing fashion, but I cannot say that Flight is simulated better in the MS products. It is just my opinion from a few years of using both programs that X-Plane could potential incorporate AI flights, more involved ATC and with the improving
See this. Start on page 3, about half way down. Geoff A. is just more diplomatic than myself. I tell them that X-Plane's flight dynamics are not up to MSFS standards, and I get deleted. Since I own X-Plane 8 & 9 in addition to FS9 and FSX, I'm just trying to be a bit helpful. Geoff owns and fly's a twin engine Baron, and I own and fly a Van's RV6A. And BTW, I use X-Plane for it's mountain topography, and not it's flight dynamics.http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showto...20&start=20L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, I have to admit Larry Xplane is growing on me.What I find interesting is that I find the scenery, water, and autogen (when set at a reasonable level) much better than fsx.It is the much touted flight dynamics I have a problem with! :( Here is a shot I just took of my state of Michigan. I have to say-it does not look this well in fs. The trees blend in better, and the lakes with their reflections are great! Like real water they change color depending on the sky, time of day.I'm still working on getting a Baron-if I ever get one that is realistic I may ultimately become a convert-and if I don't that will be a big limiting factor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However, I have to admit Larry Xplane is growing on me.What I find interesting is that I find the scenery, water, and autogen (when set at a reasonable level) much better than fsx.It is the much touted flight dynamics I have a problem with! :( Here is a shot I just took of my state of Michigan. I have to say-it does not look this well in fs. The trees blend in better, and the lakes with their reflections are great! Like real water they change color depending on the sky, time of day.I'm still working on getting a Baron-if I ever get one that is realistic I may ultimately become a convert-and if I don't that will be a big limiting factor.
I like many scenery areas too. That's why I picked up version 9, after saying I probably wouldn't. But as you said, it's the highly publicized flight dynamics that are the problem. They just are not that good, and fall behind the standards of FS9/FSX addons by quite a measure. Months ago, I pointed this out at X-Plane org on the "other flight sims" forum. It was in regards to rudder and slips. I mentioned the RealAir SF260 & Spit as being good models in this regard. My post was replied to by a moderator, who said that the X-Plane 3rd party Spit was vastly superior in regards to flight dynamics, as he had tried the RealAir version, and then he locked the thread. I have the payware P-51 by the same author, and didn't feel that it's flight dynamics were anywhere close to the RealAir Spits. Needless to say, I didn't purchase the X-Plane Spit. However the model looks quite good. The panel also looks great, but the virtual cockpits are not up to MSFS standards. At least I've flown in a real P-51D (as a passenger), which gives me some insight on how the models should behave.That post, and the fact that I bought X-Plane 9 at Walmart ( version 8 from the org) hasn't put me on the org's top honor list. I tried to reply to the same post regarding --- X-Plane if you want to be real, and FSX as a game,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,that you did. Yet, my post was pre-checked by a moderator, and deleted as usual. Honestly.................if X-Plane want's converts, they will have to revise the flight modeling! At least you got some good dialog started.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the entire thread referenced above.Declaring MSFS a game, just plain dumb.Stating that X-Plane has the best flight dynamics, flat out false.I find it truly ironic that one of the posts actually explains in detail exactly why there is so little 3rd party support for X-Plane.... yet they wonder why at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However, I have to admit Larry Xplane is growing on me.What I find interesting is that I find the scenery, water, and autogen (when set at a reasonable level) much better than fsx.It is the much touted flight dynamics I have a problem with! :( Here is a shot I just took of my state of Michigan. I have to say-it does not look this well in fs. The trees blend in better, and the lakes with their reflections are great! Like real water they change color depending on the sky, time of day.I'm still working on getting a Baron-if I ever get one that is realistic I may ultimately become a convert-and if I don't that will be a big limiting factor.
Geofa,I do like the photo shot. I might see textures that might come close to this with GEX and UTX running in FSX. But as suggested earlier, topography is vital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting on here all the real world pilots think that the flight dynamics are abysmal, myself included. I've never felt a sim where I have felt so detached from the airplane. I don't know where anyone can think these flight dynamics are real. I wish that x-plane could have better flight dynamics and a realistic ATC system. I do like the sim for somethings like the endless amounts of customization but I wish it was in a more user friendly format.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's interesting on here all the real world pilots think that the flight dynamics are abysmal, myself included. I've never felt a sim where I have felt so detached from the airplane. I don't know where anyone can think these flight dynamics are real. I wish that x-plane could have better flight dynamics and a realistic ATC system. I do like the sim for somethings like the endless amounts of customization but I wish it was in a more user friendly format.
Great point on being detached from the airplane. I too can compare-contrast real world flying to the sims. I still haven't figured out why X-plane has the constantly replaying atc background noise. It is the most annoying aspect for me. But there is potential for change right? Let's hope. You have a good point about customization. When I was training to fly helos in the Navy we all had various setups at home. One of my friends couldn't understand why I didn't have X-Plane. She swore by it. This was back in 1999/2000. I still remember when I first demonstrated the variable sea state options you can select in X-Plane and tried to land on a moving ship that was pitching and rolling. I was impressed by that capability more than anything. Keith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know how large the download is ? I downloaded the demo installer but that will download a whole lot more. In our geography the word flatrate doesn't really exist for Internet traffic, so I'd prefer to know in advance.Cheers,Siggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is the much touted flight dynamics I have a problem with! :(
The only recent serious attempt to compare the flight models of X-plane and FSX I'm aware of can be found here http://www.simpilotnet.com/index.php?optio...=view&id=20One should also read the subsequent discussion on the author's forum http://www.simpilotnet.com/index.php?optio...=18&catid=7The discussion got off to a good start, with both parties ("camps"?) making interesting remarks. But alas, as was to be expected, after a while the debate turned very nasty, and the moderator was forced to lock the thread. :( I really wish some simmers would replace their zealotry with maturity (both sides), and of course, I don't mean you Geoff, because your appreciations are always very well balanced. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only recent serious attempt to compare the flight models of X-plane and FSX I'm aware of can be found here http://www.simpilotnet.com/index.php?optio...=view&id=20One should also read the subsequent discussion on the author's forum http://www.simpilotnet.com/index.php?optio...=18&catid=7The discussion got off to a good start, with both parties ("camps"?) making interesting remarks. But alas, as was to be expected, after a while the debate turned very nasty, and the moderator was forced to lock the thread. :( I really wish some simmers would replace their zealotry with maturity (both sides), and of course, I don't mean you Geoff, because your appreciations are always very well balanced. :(
The only recent serious attempt to compare the flight models of X-plane and FSX I'm aware of can be found here http://www.simpilotnet.com/index.php?optio...=view&id=20One should also read the subsequent discussion on the author's forum http://www.simpilotnet.com/index.php?optio...=18&catid=7The discussion got off to a good start, with both parties ("camps"?) making interesting remarks. But alas, as was to be expected, after a while the debate turned very nasty, and the moderator was forced to lock the thread. :( I really wish some simmers would replace their zealotry with maturity (both sides), and of course, I don't mean you Geoff, because your appreciations are always very well balanced. B)
I've seen it argued that X-Plane's approach of reading in the geometric shape of any aircraft and then figuring out how that aircraft will fly gives more realistic flight dynamics than flight Simulator's approach of using look-up tables. This is not necessarily so. What matters is how accurately the forces and moments on an aircraft can be estimated.X-plane uses blade element theory, which involves breaking the aircraft down into many small elements and then finding the forces on each little element. This can only give an approximation to the forces because blade element theory itself is an approximation.The values in Flight Simulator's look-up tables can be calculated using a wider range of theories, and can also use experimental results. X-plane's blade element theory could be used to calculate the values in the look-up tables, in which case the flight dynamics should be essentially the same.There an area where X-Plane's modelling is weak."Compressible flow effects are considered using Prandtl-Glauert, but transonic effects are not simulated other than an empirical mach-divergent drag increase."http://www.x-plane.com/about.htmlPrandtl-Glauert states that the pressure coefficients vary with Mach number according to 1/SQRT(1 - M^2). It isn't valid between M= 0.7 and M=1.3 because it gives an infinite value at M = 1.0. That is the reason why "transonic effects are not simulated other than an empirical mach-divergent drag increase." Look-up tables can avoid this.X-plane's approach seems to make it easier to relate an aircraft's flight dynamics to its geometry than does Flight Simulator's separation of the flight and visual models. However, I suspect whichever approach is adopted, achieving really good flight dynamics will involve tweaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However, I suspect whichever approach is adopted, achieving really good flight dynamics will involve tweaking.
My feelings exactly. Also, at this moment in time, the best "tweakers" are in all probability in the MS FS camp. I can understand why some are irritated by the "X-plane has the most realistic flight model available for personal computers" marketing hype, but unequivocally rejecting a theory because of the failures of its practitioners doesn't seem entirely correct to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" I still haven't figured out why X-plane has the constantly replaying atc background noise. It is the most annoying aspect for me. "You can turn off the background atc in the sound menu-1st thing I did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My feelings exactly. Also, at this moment in time, the best "tweakers" are in all probability in the MS FS camp. I can understand why some are irritated by the "X-plane has the most realistic flight model available for personal computers" marketing hype, but unequivocally rejecting a theory because of the failures of its practitioners doesn't seem entirely correct to me.
I don't reject the theory at all. I just know that the program isn't powerful enough to adjust for so many variables. In the end, it has to "tweaked".For instance, the included RV's with version 9 balloon up excessively, like a Cessna with flap extension. The real RV's all pitch down with flaps. This is a case for tweaking, and an example of where "blade element theory" isn't really doing it's thing............so to speak.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites